Natwest Tower / 103 Colmore Row

Height: 137m (449ft) to the roof, 165m (541ft) to the spire

Floors and use: 28 floors - 2 mixed use, 26 office

Developer: British Land

Architect: Hamiltons Architect

Status: Proposed - planning application due 2007

http://www.propertyweek.com/Pictures/460xAny/q/t/f/colmore.jpg

Okay, everybody get out your hanky's :cry:

didnt realise the replacement was to be that tall. All is not lost!

I know I thought it would be very mid-rise.

I know everyone get out your hankeys and cry :cry: :cry: :cry:

But it would be nice if they raised it to be as tall as it is now or even bigger :cheers:

Looks OK but is it really going to be 76m?It looks shorter.I hope they include the spire.

Well, here's what I think:

The orignal was a disgrace, totally out of keeping with the rest of the street, in a REALLY bad 70s way.

And I really like what they did next door, knocking down a bland forgetable 60s midrise, so forgetabale I bet half you don't even remember it to put up your classical Post Modenist design that blends in the Council house but remains impossing in it's own way, if they can manage that here I'll be happy.

But having said that, it is, was one of the best piece of Brutalism so in someways I'll be sorry to see it go. It always seemed much heigher than than the mere 80M quoted, But it was never in the right place for me...

That said I'm not sure a Glass and Steel building would be suitable either, but I'm not sure if that render reflects (ha!) the matterials.

So in the great sceem of things I can think of a lot worse building to replace, but I'm for it...

Nice doors though

Let's just say it's a better replacement than the one down the other end of colmore Row!

I strongly doubt that is the actual render. Has the real one been released yet? I remeber that was supposed to be one of the first Post and Mail renders or something along that line.

Anyways, I really don't mind the current-soon-to-be-fucked Natwest. It's 80m, and it shows up well on the skyline. It's not too boxy, and I like how odd it looks. :D I can see that it's a bit beat up, but there are PLENTY of other buildings in the city that needs to be knocked down instead. Same with Post and Mail. And with FiveWays Tower...

Here Here

I really can't see what all the emotion is for. Can somebody please explain the assets of this building. :?

I'll admit it is a powerful structure, that I can't deny because I included the building in a painting I did for my GCSE art course. But its inclusion was to show the brutal and ugly side of Birmingham architecture - like a concrete Judas in the painting of the last supper.
I also cannot forgive it's misleading name. When I was a kid, I honestly thought the strange shape of the tower was because, when viewed from above, the NatWest logo would appear in the building's footprint (like the EagleStar building in Stevenage). But no, obviously not, the building isn't even that interesting. I later learned it was named after the occupiers :sleepy: How disappointing!

It's the one in London looks like the Symbol from above

Well, here's what I think:

The orignal was a disgrace, totally out of keeping with the rest of the street, in a REALLY bad 70s way.

And I really like what they did next door, knocking down a bland forgetable 60s midrise, so forgetabale I bet half you don't even remember it to put up your classical Post Modenist design that blends in the Council house but remains impossing in it's own way, if they can manage that here I'll be happy.

But having said that, it is, was one of the best piece of Brutalism so in someways I'll be sorry to see it go. It always seemed much heigher than than the mere 80M quoted, But it was never in the right place for me...

That said I'm not sure a Glass and Steel building would be suitable either, but I'm not sure if that render reflects (ha!) the matterials.

So in the great sceem of things I can think of a lot worse building to replace, but I'm for it...

Nice doors though

I'VE BAGSIED THE DOORS!!!

What do ya mean Bio

I want the front doors to NWT

Ah I undersatbd
Don't mind me i'm just a thick shit

The reason why the Nat West has a place in the hearts of some of us is because it was actually one of the very few tall buildings of its time designed with set-backs like a US tower. Birmingham has just this one building to show for this and it's going to be pulled down, typical.... The profile is actually very interesting despite its brutalist 70s appearnace (brown is SO 1970s isn't it? Just ask the Arndale centre). I for one will be peeved to see it go - first the Post and Mail, now the Nat West - fuck me, why don't they pull down the Telecom Tower whilst we're at it cos it currently flouts the city's stupid restrictive and damaging 120m CAA ruling??

Anyway - here's a reminder of this tower in its 1984 heyday.....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower3.jpg


And this is it giving the defiant (extended) finger to all those detractors....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower2sA.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower1A.jpg

Looking at the last but one pic I posted up above, the profile actually reminds me of this tower in Amsterdam (the Rembrandt Tower - tallest in the city at 450 ft).

http://www.skyscraperpicture.com/amsterdam03.JPG

I don't actually mind the nat west tower. Not the prettiest building in B/ham, but it has it's own character. A shame it will have to be demolished. I reckon they should just reclad it maybe or something and refurbish. I did read a report somewhere (can't remember where?) claiming it was "derelict"??? It doen't look derelict to me, just neglected!

But at the same time, I don't mind it's proposed "replacement" as a design in itself - although it would be better if it were a little taller.

Also, has anyonelse noticed the tree currently growing out of the top of Natwest btw?

What tree????? What you talking about?? :eek:

Well, a plant or something, it seems to be growing from the top of it!! Take a look next time you are in town, it seems to be on the side facing towards St Phillips square! Very odd!

I don't want it knocked down seeing them beautiful photots. Build the new one on Broad Street

Try and stick a tree Preservation order on the tree that's apparently growing on the top of it, that'll slow em down..

Anyone got any pictures of the buildings that were there before the Natwest tower?

glad to see the back of it, it does not fit in with the lovely victorian buildings that surrond it

And this is it giving the defiant (extended) finger to all those detractors....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower2sA.jpg

Actually, looking at this I don't care if it goes. Its only redeeming feature is the core extending above- other than that it is fairly nondescript. I will miss it from the skyline though :(

Floorplates are too small and the replacement looks pretty funky (if it gets thrpugh planning..)

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm *Knock it down* he said in a tone of evil *KNOCK IT DOWN!!!!* I will miss it tough, awwwww bye bye. :wave: But yet again a modern funky building will be pretty good, and if the height gets extended it will be beautiful m))

Actually, looking at this I don't care if it goes. Its only redeeming feature is the core extending above- other than that it is fairly nondescript.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower2sA.jpg
Hang on Bio, that's the extended 12" version. In the flesh the tower is much shorter than that. The core only protrudes a few metres above the third tier.

"extended 12" version"

^^ :yes: :rofl: :rofl:

:hilarious

glad to see the back of it, it does not fit in with the lovely victorian buildings that surrond it

Neither does Selfridges!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower2sA.jpg
Hang on Bio, that's the extended 12" version. In the flesh the tower is much shorter than that. The core only protrudes a few metres above the third tier.

I wonder whether Martin G has been tinkering....

I tought it was a bit tall

That's only cos the building is quite obviously saying "UP YOURS, DEMOLITION MUTHAFUKKAZ!!!!"

Funny how it looks better taller...

So what's happening to it these days, is it now empty? Any scaffolding going up? Or have the blown it up using some niffy implosion type thing?

It's just standing there empty, no scaffolding, no explosives .... nothing. I wouldn't mind getting up it with my camera before they tear it down.

CH

They should stick a big inflable santa on the top...

Yeah... Let it bob in the wind... No Stick Early Bird up there instead...

I’ve Just watched the demolition program on Channel 4. There were a few 50's and brutal 60s / 70s buildings on there which people wanted knocking down and it's really brought home to me how much the Post and Mail building should have been saved and now how much we have to lose.

Most of the featured buildings were bad, blighting towns & people’s lives but some were just architecturally unfashionable at the moment and very good buildings.

Birmingham has more than it's fair share of architectural unfashionable buildings, some good and some bad, but what's worrying me is that we're threatening to knock down the very good ones along with most of the bad.

Take Peat House for example – it’s unsympathetic, uninteresting, of little significance and but can obviously have it’s bloodline traced back to Natwest Tower.

Natwest is everything Peat House isn’t and should be lauded for what it is, a precursor with character and intent – heavy and optimistic - unlike the proposed Colmore Centre.

I’m really at a loss with this old, albeit early visual as it looks to maximise floorplates for return and pushes the architectural debate with a gimmicky hammerhead roof.

Now I don’t want to seem anti RBS – They’ve been good for the city – but they stopped blocks 7 & 9 of Brindleyplace reaching their full potential by being bean counters and it appears that from said visual they would do the same if given the opportunity with Natwest. (I am guessing they own the land.)

Building stock of this era is gaining public credibility - especially within the capital - National Theater, Barbican, Trelic Tower, etc - and I really feel strongly that our Natwest must stay. Ok, it's on a prime site but I could see a quality BANK style restaurant bar in the banking hall, serviced or high-end small offices on the centre section and apartments at the top. That’s viable isn’t it?

Surely RBS aught to be encouraged to build another better building else were within the CBD with the money saved in clearing the site.

An uninformed heavy handed approach failed in the past and irreplaceable treasures such as Masons Hall, Central Library, Old New Street were knocked down and now it looks like we may do the same again.

The Post and Mail Tower should not have gone and I feel very strongly that we should be refurbishing and reusing both Natwest and Central Library.

I will be writing to my local MP!

http://i1.tinypic.com/xepkc5.jpg

http://i3.tinypic.com/xepkxw.jpg
Bronze Natwest swastika doors. yum yum :)

So what's the latest with this.. it's definitly nolonger occupied

Knocking it down will be a BIG mistake. It is big and brutal and ugly, but it is of its time, and it looks good where it is.

yuck, horrid building. Gives you the impression of "don't come near me you bastards!" 'dozers can't come quick enough imho

I agree with Mr. Walnuts, although I do think it was a mistake to build it there in the first place.

But I can't belive they've got a building on that location empty, I know the floor plans are a bit small, but surly someone could use it?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v176/MartianG/NatWestTower2sA.jpg

http://i1.tinypic.com/xgdwfd.jpg

Ok what about this? If it doesn't offer big enough floorplates for the CBD why not remodel it so that it does. Fill in the gap over the banking hall with glass, keeping it as visually light as possible. Then and give it a roof garden and a 'dunlop fin' with a nice lighting scheme or clad in solar panels. or even a manc beetham sail on top of that which generates energy and maybe Bronze window frames alighned thoughout? ah, that could look the shit and it would give it Colmore Gate proportions too.

I'd love to see someone like Urban splash take on Natwest House how good would that be. :) I imagine Associated Architects could do great things with this building too

Foxy - fancy a mission?

Urban Splash ask, on their website, for buildings that need reviving.

I think you should give them your great idea. They love the Rotunda - let them do the biz on NWT too! They might give you a finders fee!

:okay: :horse: I nailed this together from a couple of rants and forwarded them a load of pics. Please don't point out my spelling mistakes to me now :)

Dear Sirs

I'm sure you are bombarded with these sorts of emails everyday however I have noted on your website the suggestion to get in touch 'if you know of any suitable space that could do with a little Urban Splash imagination'.

Having seen the excellent work that is progressing with the Rotunda and Fort Dunlop in Birmingham coupled with the shortsighted loss of architecturally outstanding Post and Mail building I feel that Birmingham's Natwest Tower could be more than a little ripe for a the Urban Splash treatment.

Birmingham has more than its fair share of architectural unfashionable buildings, some good and some bad, but what's worrying is that we're starting to knock down some of the very good ones along with most of the bad. An uninformed heavy handed approach failed in the past and irreplaceable treasures such as Masons Hall, Central Library, Snow Hill Station and the original New Street were knocked down and now it looks like we may be doing the same again.

One of the most at risk I feel is Natwest Tower. Yes, it's slightly architecturally unfashionable at the moment but it should and could be lauded for what it is - an architecturally significant building in Birmingham with character and intent.

Building stock of this era such as the National Theater, Barbican, Trelic Tower, etc have gained public credibility within the capital and I really feel strongly that our heavy & optimistic Natwest must stay.

One of the reasons for the building to be vacated was that it was no longer capable of servicing current office needs. The office floor plates were not large enough for RBS's requirements and the interior and services were in need of complete replacement, however the architecture is very good and the location is second to none.

I can see two options which I feel could potentially prove viable and return this vacant city centre tower to use

Option1 - Extensive makeover
There is interesting detailing aplenty externally and I presume internally too. The Tower is on a prime site and I can easily envisage a quality BANK style restaurant bar in the banking hall, serviced or high-end small offices such as the ones found in Edgbaston in the centre section and apartments at the top.

Option 2 - Remodeling
If the tower at present doesn't offer big enough office floorplates for the CBD why not remodel it so that it does by filling in the gap over the banking hall with glass, keeping it as visually light and translucent as possible or sympathetically adopt simple, elegant, bronze window frames aligned to the existing architecture throughout.

The building could then be 'greened' with roof garden and a 'Dunlop fin' extended from the cores. This could be clad in solar panels or could easily take a purposeful lighting scheme and even a Manchester Beetham style sail could sit on top of that which could generate renewable energy.

The remodeling would also mean that the building would mirror the proportions Colmore Gate at the other end of Colmore Row in the same way that the Rotunda will do to the High Street and the proposed stepped tower at Martineau Galleries.

I imagine Associated Architects, Glenn Howells or any of the other talented local firms could do great things with this building.

Now the Post and Mail Tower has gone I feel even more strongly that we should at least be refurbishing and reusing Natwest Tower and that Urban Splash may be the company with vision to see something like this through.

Thank you for your time.

Yeah but isn't it all too late? Hasn't it been bought w'th a view to demolision and replacement by something similar to the image we have knocking arround here? Don't mean to be pessimistic and i like your idea Foxy but i think this bird has already flown it's nest.

probably, but there's no harm in trying

Nice one Foxy - very eloquent and it shows a bit of passion too!

Good work :cheers:

did you include pictures of the tower in ur email?

yep, loads

Foxy, your a good man! (or woman)

nice one!!! ,

But you do know that orginal picture has been digitally enhanced in its vertical form?

I noticed that just as I was about to send it but that wasn't going to stop me.

These were the shots I sent along with at the remodelled before and after. I'm sure you've seen them all before. Thanks to Smiley and Martin.

http://i1.tinypic.com/xlyrkm.jpg

http://i3.tinypic.com/xlyrn7.jpg

http://i1.tinypic.com/xlyt06.jpg

http://i3.tinypic.com/xlyt5d.jpg

http://i2.tinypic.com/xlyweb.jpg

http://i1.tinypic.com/xlyw6t.jpg

http://i1.tinypic.com/xgdwfd.jpg





Er....Foxy boy....have you asked for express permission from the original photographer before you start violating their work in this shameless manner? ;)

But you do know that orginal picture has been digitally enhanced in its vertical form?


;) :tongue2: The 12" extended remix!

My speciality no less! :lol:

London's NatWest Tower is way, way cooler :)

http://www.willfox.com/images/london/2/1.jpg

^^

OI!!! OFF TOPIC!!!! :no:

:tongue2:

Its better looking but its less cool.

London's NatWest Tower is way, way cooler :)

Maybe so, but if you insist on copying ours and putting it on steroids whilst in gestation then what do you expect? :baeh3: ;)

Yeah - screw Tower 42, Brums NWT is even cooler now that it's got a mind, heart and soul of its own...... :tongue2:

http://tinypic.com/xnhyyr.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a366/robinsonworld/HPIM0210.jpg

Still looming!

I am going to go out on a limb here and say, I think the Natwest tower is great!

I think its major problem is it has lots of concrete which is very very dirty, imagine the concrete panels cleaned to a whitish or light yellowish hue or replaced with the same but in portland stone, and you have a fantastic building, can any of the photoshoppers do that?

I think it stick out terribly in that location though.

I'd love to see the Urban Splash plans for this one.

I really like it, it's one of the first things you see when you walk down the ramp from New Street, it helps create that big city feeling

I'll miss this tower when it's gone. Yes, it's rather ugly to say the least and it would be a bad thing if Birmingham was riddled with them. But this is a truly one of a kind tower in Brum and is a complete 70s throwback which in my books is a good thing. :yes:

So instead we get (yet) another 'walk right past' niceish glass tower. Not too bad but it doesn't look individual. I like the way the NatWest Tower sticks out from the rest of the buildings - buildings that blend in are boring!

Buildings that give you the finger are always far superior! ;)

I walk past it everyday and it's massive when coming up Newhall St. I really hope Urban Splash have taken on Foxy's notes about it. It has amazing windows at ground level. I was thinking if it is kept and used as apartments or hotel, the lower pedestal area could be reclad in silver / gold and the rest of it merely rendered in smooth white. A tall white building with loads of square windows!!

I used to like this building years ago, but now it looks rather bulky, brutal and monolithic: too much concrete, too little glass, not enough light or brightness. I won't be all that fussed to see it go to be honest

When is it going down?

Birmingham needs diversity and variety - what's wrong with just one 1970s vanguard retained from the old skool when so many potentially anonymous trendy new NON-towers and squat fuckers will be springing up everywhere soon? I say let it stay - Five Ways Tower is another one which deserves to be listed cos it looks very sleek and American - BOTH these buildings actually have US-inspired profiles. And they just happen to be the two that are coming down too, for fucks sakes. :no: :bleep:

It seems a backward step if two instantly recognisable landmark towers are going to be replaced by buildings that will be shorter. It's just such a cop out.

I agree you regarding 5 ways tower because that has always been one of my alltime favourites; but NWT just doesn't cut mustard any more

When is it going down?

I used to like this building years ago, but now it looks rather bulky, brutal and monolithic: too much concrete, too little glass, not enough light or brightness. I won't be all that fussed to see it go to be honest

That's exactly why I like it so! :yes:

Come on... if we really mean business then we'll stand in front of the bulldozers on the demolition date. Count me in. I think our own 'NatWest Tower' is well worth keeping, and surely this forum allows us to organise/mobalise a proper protest against crass and unilateral planning decisions such as this.

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?

When is it going down?



Jesus man - you a stuck record or summat??

We heard you the first time but couldn't answer because we don't KNOW the answer as to when it is coming down! ;)

I just hope it gets reprieved cos I like a bit of rough...architecturally speaking, of course... :tongue2:

Jesus man - you a stuck record or summat??

We heard you the first time but couldn't answer because we don't KNOW the answer as to when it is coming down! ;)

I just hope it gets reprieved cos I like a bit of rough...architecturally speaking, of course... :tongue2:

You would have made more of an impact if you had scratched it a bit first
like into a kickin' phat groove...man

"Wh,Wh,Wh,When,When,When,is it g,g,g,g, going dow,dow,dow,dow,dooooowwwwn ????" then added "on me, bitch"

scratch that question mark, oh yes

^^ :lol:

Add the perfunctory '88 remix-style "AH - YEAH!!!" into the mix too and we're really cookin'!!

Martin you've only gone and been the first person in my life apart from my older brother to mention what we call the "Ha - Yeah" disease that was in just about every dance song from about 1987 to 1992!! (Presuming that is what you're talking about!) I could list a gazillion songs that featured it, my fave being Tricky Disco by Tricky Disco but that was slightly different. I think the Beatmasters were fans of said sound effect, and Going Back To My Roots by FPI Project has it all the way through on the instrumental version! :pepper:

The last "Ha - Yeah" song that I know of is Tetris by Dr Spin in 1992 - it went out with a bang. Bring it back I say! :yes:

Ok, back on subject...

And don't forget TIMMY MALLET - he had two crappy hits with them on too - but then he was an irritating speccy c*** wasn't he? :yes:

(Actually, most of them 1988 hits were utter shite. One of the worst years ever for chart pop music- and I think that was the beginning of the end for me..... ) :no:

Okay - NOW back on topic...... ;)

I wasn't even gonna mention Itsy Bitsy Teeny Weeny :blahblah: and Seven Little Girls Sitting :blahblah: so as not to offend... ;)

Did it post many times?


Silly Minefield, today's build is go damn buggy.

Blimey this thread became popular again all of a sudden, did anyone actually answer Simon's question btw? A poll amongst the Bham forumers on this building would be interesting, should it stay or go? Personally I do like NWT with it's strange tree growing near the top.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/Robdann/Birmingham%202/NatWest3.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/Robdann/Birmingham%202/NatWest1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/Robdann/Birmingham%205/PICT004308062006.jpg

I'd like to see the plans for the new building, and anything from the Urban Splash plans, if they've got any.

But put me down for a stayer. At the moment.

If it is to be replaced, build something taller.

but it needs a clean before it can stay!

Also I've just noticed on the first page I was up for replacing it, my, I'm soo ficcal!

I'd like to see the plans for the new building, and anything from the Urban Splash plans, if they've got any.

But put me down for a stayer. At the moment.

I'd love to see what Urban Splash would do with NWT

Or the Birmingham Alliance.

If it is to be replaced, build something taller.
It's going for a low rise building. Grr.

I can finally see the tree that Smileyface talks about - in that third picture of his. I honestly didn't think he was telling the truth all this time as prior to this pic, I hadn't ever seen it from any of the pictures previously put up here. Perhaps it's a rooftop garden for some of the more privileged members of staff back in the day?

I can finally see the tree that Smileyface talks about - in that third picture of his. I honestly didn't think he was telling the truth all this time as prior to this pic, I hadn't ever seen it from any of the pictures previously put up here. Perhaps it's a rooftop garden for some of the more privileged members of staff back in the day?

That's just one of them, there are several trees up there

Well, can you prove this to me with some more exclusive pictures then squire??

There's an abundance up there....roaming herds of cyclops have been reported too

Do you have the pics? Or are you going to tell me that they also keep herds of geese up there in the service cores too, in order to ward off potential terrorists?

This has gone out to the Post forthwith!! Expect to see it on Fri / Mon!

Dear Sir / Madam



I walk past the former NatWest Building every evening and I must say she is looking very forlorn now. The last I read / heard, was that it was going to be replaced with a new building (albeit lower in height) and containing the magic Grade A regulation office floor-plates, that Birmingham is sorely lacking. I have a quirky soft-spot for this particular 1970s tower, and am dreading the slight discomfort I last felt when I witnessed the former Post & Mail tower being demolished. There are, after all, plenty of other sites shortly coming available (like Masshouse) where more Grade A office space is being created.

I am of the opinion that the NatWest Building should be kept and re-launched as a different facility, like a top-notch hotel or apartment block. All she needs is the old banking hall to be spruced up in and out, with an expensive cladding scheme reaching up to the set-back, then the actual tower to be finished in a pure white render, to attain a really striking appearance. Just imagine what a development agency like Urban Splash could do with a building like NatWest!

Do we really need to keep knocking down our tall buildings that originate from the unfashionable 60s and 70s? Every architectural era makes a statement and I can think of some very poor ones that have been made just recently, mentioning no names!

On the subject of wiping away the DNA of our built environment, and in particular the future Longbridge Technology Park, I am not happy about the plans by Advantage West Midlands and Modwen Properties, to get rid of the steel bridge that crosses the Bristol Road there. Ok, so they can demolish the buildings, but why can’t they retain this marvellous structure in skeleton form as an art exhibit and statement of 100 years of motor heritage? It’s nothing short of petty vandalism.

I really love Nat West Tower, it is a big, brutal chunk of the city which needs to be preserved.

We pull this stuff down at our peril.

Here's a little piccy showing a variety of architectural styles... if Natwest was clean it would look better :)

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a264/Biosonic/4821a66c.jpg

I can finally see the tree that Smileyface talks about - in that third picture of his. I honestly didn't think he was telling the truth all this time as prior to this pic, I hadn't ever seen it from any of the pictures previously put up here. Perhaps it's a rooftop garden for some of the more privileged members of staff back in the day?

I dunno. From this pic of the Natwest building from Google earth i can only see one bit of green which is the tree i think

http://www.batista.co.uk/natwest.JPG

There's another bit of green on the other side of the building. Go up from the tree, and you see another bit of (less obvious) tree. Maybe a smaller tree :jippo:

I got this photo (which I put on Wikipedia) and it also happens to have a suicidal seagull ready to either drop a shit on me or rob the bag of chips I was carrying.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c7/Natwest_House_Bham.JPG

I dont think the image is big enough actually.

Congratulations to MSP for getting his letter on NWT in the Birmingham Post (Monday I think it was)

:applause:

MSP?

morestoreysplease

Oh yeh. Can some one summarise what the letter said, I missed the BHAM Post on Monday.?

the letter

Dear Sir / Madam



I walk past the former NatWest Building every evening and I must say she is looking very forlorn now. The last I read / heard, was that it was going to be replaced with a new building (albeit lower in height) and containing the magic Grade A regulation office floor-plates, that Birmingham is sorely lacking. I have a quirky soft-spot for this particular 1970s tower, and am dreading the slight discomfort I last felt when I witnessed the former Post & Mail tower being demolished. There are, after all, plenty of other sites shortly coming available (like Masshouse) where more Grade A office space is being created.

I am of the opinion that the NatWest Building should be kept and re-launched as a different facility, like a top-notch hotel or apartment block. All she needs is the old banking hall to be spruced up in and out, with an expensive cladding scheme reaching up to the set-back, then the actual tower to be finished in a pure white render, to attain a really striking appearance. Just imagine what a development agency like Urban Splash could do with a building like NatWest!

Do we really need to keep knocking down our tall buildings that originate from the unfashionable 60s and 70s? Every architectural era makes a statement and I can think of some very poor ones that have been made just recently, mentioning no names!

On the subject of wiping away the DNA of our built environment, and in particular the future Longbridge Technology Park, I am not happy about the plans by Advantage West Midlands and Modwen Properties, to get rid of the steel bridge that crosses the Bristol Road there. Ok, so they can demolish the buildings, but why can’t they retain this marvellous structure in skeleton form as an art exhibit and statement of 100 years of motor heritage? It’s nothing short of petty vandalism.

Thanks Woody :) Great letter too, well done MSP!

Well it's too late now, they have started to strip it.

Strip the Nat West Tower?

Who's doing the rebuild of this, is there a website or owt?

I've only seen the one render of the replacement on this website, where did that come from?

Skyscrapernews.com probably.

Didn't look any different to me.

Have a picture of the nice doors:

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a366/robinsonworld/HPIM0427.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a366/robinsonworld/HPIM0426.jpg

Taken from the Colmore Row and Environs conservation area draft charachter appraisal.... @ http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/Media/?MEDIA_ID=143824


3. National Westminster House
The projected redevelopment of National
Westminster House on Colmore Row will involve
the removal of the landmark formed by the
NatWest Tower. The Council will ensure that any
future development on the site is of exceptional
architectural quality. The new landmark building
will be expected to reinterpret the character of the
conservation area by means of a complementary
yet contemporary design which should provide
both a positive element in the streetscape and a
distinctive addition to the city centre skyline.

So that hints at a well designed highrise tower yet no indication on whether it will be taller or shorter than the existing tower. Shame.

Well, we have the opportunity to comment on the plan (possiby to include the tower in the conservation scheme - after all it was designed to have a small footprint and therefore involved the demolition of 1 previous building)?

Also - the council are at least committed to getting something of "exceptional quality" :)

I don't think there's a thread about this one, so.

This is what it was:

Height (roof) 80.00

Floors (O.G) 23

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/224NationalWestminsterHouse_pic1.jpg

And this is what it will be:

Height (roof) 76.00 (estimated)
(Spire Height 92.00)

Floors (O.G) 18
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/2630NationalWestminsterHouseRedevelopment_pic2.jpg

So any news? Whens the old one coming down?

Why does it have a fire hydrant outside?

Thats not the design. This site is ridiculously small. Im counting on something alot more substantial then what's there already.

This site is ridiculously small.

It can't be that small they are redeveloping Edmund house and Lancaster house aswell.

Why does it have a fire hydrant outside?

:laugh:

It is one of those council "classical" revolving advertisement post things. :)

Looks like plans are well under way for an "iconic office building" as revealed in The Birmingham Post this morning.

Looks like plans are well under way for an "iconic office building" as revealed in The Birmingham Post this morning.

What does that say then?

Not a lot unfortunately.

However, with just about everyone having an opinion on this site (as one of the most sensitive in the city) I can't imagine that BL will propose something crap.

It will be interesting to see what comes of it...

this will have to be one of the highest quality office blocks in the city, even better than the one next to it, which is an excellent example of good design imo!

http://www.freefoto.com//images/1046/18/1046_18_55_web.jpg?&k=Grade+II+listed+Council+House

I can remember being in a conversation with the head of planning for the city centre when Labour were in council and he really slated Nat West Tower, refering to it as a big brown ugly building and on ethat should go, at the time I dissagreed but after a long rethink, it adds little to the skyline and is unatractive from street level so I am looking forward to this going!!! providing the new building looks like the rendering, this part of the city and on to Colmore Row edging out towards the Jewellery Quarter has the highest quality of regeneration and NEW architecture in the city and up there with the best in Britain IMO.

well EK we might as well forget the first rendering for the site, that has long gone!

I think a predominantly glass & steel structure for this site is wrong, & think a building of stone / sandstone would be more in keeping with the site. As for the height of a building to replace the NatWest Tower, I'm not sure. I'd like to see a computerised image from Victoria Square showing a 30 storey office building.

well EK we might as well forget the first rendering for the site, that has long gone!

shame... not sure a tall building here is right location? Paradise area maybe but not here IMO

I kind of agree, but also think "well, Natwest was there so why not another"?

For the £25m they've paid, plus probably another £50m to rebuild it, it is likely to be big and top notch!

Well HCT cost £50 million but the quality wasn't too brilliant.

I kind of agree, but also think "well, Natwest was there so why not another"?

For the £25m they've paid, plus probably another £50m to rebuild it, it is likely to be big and top notch!

Well if it is going to be big, what about some kind of nod to Neo Gothic Brum encompassed in the design? I wouldn't care about the height.

im not to piccy about height as long as its over around 40/50m. also, as long as it isnt made from transparent glass to give that see through image, (not that i dont like it, its just simply the wrong place) im not too fussed either.
so as some1 said earlier, a stone kind of look such as the one next door but with an origional design and a bit more height.

Well if it is going to be big, what about some kind of nod to Neo Gothic Brum encompassed in the design? I wouldn't care about the height.

That's getting my juices flowing (as it were!).

I think it is going to have to have a tower to be viable, but:

- a street-level section, maybe 5 storeys high, could be incorporated, with the tower stepped back.

- lots of points/triangles (I am thinking along the lines of Hudson Bay at the Central TV studios)

- detailed/layered facades.

Maybe British Land are also after the TSB building behind it? They could do something a bit mroe substantial and keep the tower away from Colmore Row then.

I am used to post on the London forum. I do not believe I ever post on the Birmingham forum.

Today British Land (Leadenhall Building: 224m; Willis Building: 125m, Broadgate Tower: 165m) has announced what I believe is the most fantastic news ever for Birmingham skyscrapers enthusiasts. It also made the headline of Property Week.

British Land has today announced the decision to build an iconic skyscraper in this prime location of Birmingham. Height is unknown.
Expect something tall and top quality.

Here is the full story:http://www.britishland.com/pressrelease170107.htm

Press releases
Prime Birmingham City Office Development Secured
17/01/2007

British Land is expanding its provincial development portfolio with the addition of the former Nat West building in Colmore Row, Birmingham.

This prime city office site, located in the heart of Birmingham, was sold with vacant possession by Omega Land for £25 million.

British Land has appointed the architects Hamiltons to work with it to design a new high quality signature office building on what is widely believed to be the best office development site in central Birmingham.

Robert Samuel, Director of British Land Developments, said: “We have an established portfolio of development sites in the Midlands including Blythe Valley Business Park, Solihull and New Century Park, Coventry. We are pleased to have acquired this prime City centre site and are looking forward to working with Birmingham City Council and the local community to develop an iconic and attractive addition to Birmingham’s office skyline.”

Councillor Ken Hardeman, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Birmingham City Council, said: "Whatever form it takes, I am sure that the scheme will be of the highest quality to reflect our aspirations for this prominent site in the heart of our civic and commercial area. I look forward to working with British Land to deliver a landmark scheme which will enhance Birmingham's reputation as a global city."

Enjoy. Birmingham's future is bright.

Enjoy. Birmingham's future is bright.

Thanks for the post, it should be top quality :)

I'll be sad to see the Natwest tower go, yes it's ugly, yes the floorplates are too small, yes it's been empty for a while, yes the street level is poor, but it is an iconic shape. Still, it's progress innit?

Uh oh. What words did I just see in the news article: landmark, iconic. Oh we're doomed :ohno:!


:lol:

this does sound very promising and i think the constant reference to "skyline" is something we should be aware of!

i wait with baited breathe!

No No No, this is not the place for an iconic tower. It needs to be something thats nice enough when viewed on its own but doesn't steal focus from the historic architecture when seen from those areas.

http://www.freefoto.com//images/1046/18/1046_18_55_web.jpg?&k=Grade+II+listed+Council+House

But just imagine if they cleaned it, or even painted it the same cream colour as the the two Council House, that new one

No No No, this is not the place for an iconic tower. It needs to be something thats nice enough when viewed on its own but doesn't steal focus from the historic architecture when seen from those areas.

yes, but can you not see that through smart design, you can have both... the great thing od stepping building back from the street front... similar to it now.... there is not reason why you cant have a nice 5 storey podium that fits in with the surrounding, and then step it back, and have a great glass, and mixed stone tower rising another 20/30 storeys!

I'm not against the principle of a tower in this location its just that iconic these days means crazy shapes and fussy cladding, which can be great in the right locations and with a good design, like The Cube and Selfridges but can look just awful like CJC. I jsut think that an 'iconic' tower may look harm the setting of Victoria square. Does that sound a bit too much like Ruth Kelly?
Saying that though, if it was iconic looking like the Chrysler Building it would be great.

Something akin to Chrysler would be very nice :)

I like CJC btw - just not aming historic buildings. It would look nice in Eastside.

I fully agree with you telford boy, colmore row is one of very few select areas in the city that needs to conserve its character and we can't just build 80 storeys (i wish) of mundane unimaginative character. a chrysler would be perfect but it depends on wether the developer can get it right which would be a rather complex task but you only need to look at the starbucks building which in my opinion is one of the greatest pieces of modern architecture sitting next the council house.

I understand that John Silver at Hamilton’s has been given the Nat West Tower project. He has worked on the following projects:


new Stansted Airport terminal building:
http://www.cambridge2000.com/gallery/images/P4265062e.jpg

Lycee Albert Camus in Frejus:
http://www.arhitektura.co.yu/images/_cons/bioclimatic1/wind_catchers05.jpg

Cambridge Law Faculty:
http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/Law%20faculty/C0031-1%20exterior.jpg
Commerzbank Headquarters in Frankfurt:
http://www.pritzkerprize.com/foster/IMG0006.jpg

ASPIRE National Training Centre in North London:
http://www.aspire.org.uk/img/antc.jpg

European headquarters for Electronic Arts in Chertsey:
http://www.michaelpage.co.uk/imagebank/5718_europe_hq.gif

City of London office buildings at Holborn Place and Tower Place:
http://www.londonarchitecture.co.uk/Images/TheCity/TowerPlace-001.jpg


Are we confident of getting an appropriate building in this prime location? :ohno:

not from those examples! The Frankfurt one would make a good Arena Central, but the others look like a Millinium point's ugly releations!

Not the right place for an iconic skyscraper? What are you guys on about! I think we discussed this months ago, Its pretty much perfect. A nice light glassed tower would do wonders for this area.

I shall wait to see what is proposed. If it's not worthy or enough good I will oppose it vehemently...

...I wait with bated breath

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/Robdann/Birmingham%205/PICT004308062006.jpg
Not my pic

not from those examples! The Frankfurt one would make a good Arena Central, but the others look like a Millinium point's ugly releations!

Or indeed the revamped UCE campus building at Westbourne Road, Edgbaston.

Um, I thought the Frankfurt Commerzbank Headquarters extension was designed by Norman Foster?

that frankfurt tower is amazing, I have seen it twice and when you walk past you get a real feeling of height, I think because your eyes are drawn to the different levels, it just looks huge and interesting, If a building of this calibre were to replace natwest tower I would strongly support.

Me too. The views from the top of it are awesome. I got up there for free and I just got this overwhelming urge to laugh at people on MainTower below us who had to pay to get to the top. It really is a beautiful tower.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d101/Erebus555/Frankfurt%2006/221513_85081.jpg

Um, I thought the Frankfurt Commerzbank Headquarters extension was designed by Norman Foster?

Indeed it was designed by Norman Foster & Partners - John Silver worked there from 1984 and was made a Director in 1994. He joined Hamilton's in 2004.

His brief biog is at:

http://www.hamilton-assoc.com/html/we_html.php?menu_id=2&section_id=16&sub_section_id=33&sub_sub_section_id=4

Aah! Thanks for that.

Fear not Brummies. British Land build what they say they are going to - usually on time and on budget. And they build well - no cutting corners. I fully expect a very very classy tower in Brum... this building when completed will probably command the highest office rents in the city.

Great news for Birmingham.

That Frankfurt scraper really looks ahead of its time, if something like that were placed on Colmore row with that height, it would connect well overlooking the BT tower. It seems the old tower is growing a mini forest at the top.

If the Commerzbank Tower was built on Colmore Row, it would get extra kudos for being so environmentally friendly. It's air conditioning system is powered by the plant levels which are at each inset in the tower. It's so cool (temperature-wise) inside the plantrooms its incredible.

i have faith in birmingham city council, the architects and british land!

You only have to look at British land's current and passed projects to know they produce quality developments, we should get something special.

Fear not Brummies. British Land build what they say they are going to - usually on time and on budget. And they build well - no cutting corners. I fully expect a very very classy tower in Brum... this building when completed will probably command the highest office rents in the city.

Great news for Birmingham.

That sounds reassuring :)

The stuff they have on in London at the moment looks good.

Apparently Hamiltons also designed this for Multiplex:

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/wjfox2005/London_general/Multiplex-Tower-1.jpg
(Borrowed from Will on the London threads)

Now I am not suggesting we'll get this for Colmore Row (I can hear the howls of protest from the Conservationists) but it shows they can do good stuff :)

I think I would swallow my priciples Bio, if Birmingham were to get a tower of this quality on Colmore Row, I much prefer it to the Commerzbank tower which is a monster of a building, well built but too brutalist.

The Multiplex Tower is beautiful. It's for the Elephant and Castle area isn't it?

I think we can garantee a high quality building here as I didn't see the name Crosby mentioned in any of the news articles here...

Thank the Lord for that!

Why would Crosby do an Office building anyway? :nuts:

Nice little map of Crosby developments however on that note

http://www.crosbyhomes.co.uk/images/crosby/birmmaplarge.jpg

Never noticed just how Big Southside was before...

Anybody got any pics of I-land then? Haven't been down there in ages. Steel work is up isn't it?

I was near I-land other day. Yes some steelwork up now so pics would be good.

Any news on the Armouries and unity house opp. They really need to keep the old frontage on unity house development.

lol dont know what you guys are thinking but crosby are an amazng company and (until orion) have had nthing but top quality developments... there are FAR worse hous builders out ther to be scared of... i for one would love crosby to stay a loyal client!

ps the armeries got rejected (rightly so) when the planning app was sumbitted, aint hard from crosby since on this one!

Any news on the Armouries and unity house opp. They really need to keep the old frontage on unity house development.

Last time I heard they were def. going to keep the Victorian front. Just suprised it hasn't been burnt down, in mysterious circumstances, you know, like the other ones.

Yeah Woody knew it was rejected just hoping a similar scheme is built.

Stephen I hope no-one does that as its one of the nicest bits in the entire south-side/gay quarter.

Anyway, back to Natwest. I hope the replacement doesnt leave the entrance to the adjoining block on Newhall street and the back of the office as visible as it is at present. I know there needs to be an entrance for deliveries but it looks ghastly exposing the rear of the building.

theres a few 8-12 floor office buildings around that area of birmingham which are very modern, but built on old buildings as bases. edmund street is the only example i can think of right now..
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o175/flyingtackle/edmund.jpg


so in natwest's case, one step further than a reclad - remove the dark bricks from the top , keep half of those concrete windows but give them a new look, and then build a more modern extension on top. Keeping a souvenir of that era of architecture

134 Edmund Street is a great looking building.

^^ aye, my uncle works there for anthony collins soliciters...the view from the balcony deck on the nineth floor is great! they let you up there aswell

I sometimes work for the company who did the fit-out. Here's the view from the Anthony Collins reception :)

Not bad eh?

http://i10.tinypic.com/4gexxk8.jpg

http://i10.tinypic.com/2ppac7d.jpg

What a great angle, very rarely seen ... great pictures!

Didn't know this was another Madin building too. Found this in Pevsner.

The National Westminster Bank development by the John Madin Design Group, 1973-4. The most important Brutalist commercial building in the city, disastrous in context but with its own tremendous integrity. Low banking hall to the corner of Newhall Street, tower behind stepping up from sixteen to twenty-one storeys with horns on top, and originally a five-storey block to Colmore Row.

The first designs of 1964 show influence from Louis Kahn's University of Pittsburgh. The layout as built draws on the Smithsons' Economist development in St James's, London. Rough concrete aggregate and plum coloured Staffordshire bricks: industrial, romantic materials. Canted corners to the banking hall, the original metal doors with an abstract pattern of triangles.

The Colmore Row block re-clad and heightened to eight storeys in 1996-7 by the Seymour Harris Partnership, in an attempt, sponsored by city planners, to recreate the lost streetscape of Colmore Row. Well intentioned, but it makes nonsense of Madin's design.

Not a million miles away from the Economist Building

http://i5.tinypic.com/441mn8z.jpg

http://i7.tinypic.com/2jcyf11.jpg

http://i12.tinypic.com/2rd9khv.jpg

http://i5.tinypic.com/2r39jcj.jpg

http://i5.tinypic.com/2istcgl.jpg

http://i18.tinypic.com/2s6k3te.jpg

http://i12.tinypic.com/2crophe.jpg

http://i18.tinypic.com/4dhgi8m.jpg

Well, the news is I am hearing something in the order of....


100m


:banana:

Thought it would be reasonably tall, I just hope its a unique design or at least something with a spire to make it a tad more recognisable. Its such a prominant position.

Well, the news is I am hearing something in the order of....


100m


:banana:

:pepper:! That's put my despair at losing such a tower to sleep. There is a little part of me that wants to hold on to the NatWest Tower. It's something like you will only miss it until its gone. A bit like the Post and Mail Tower...

The civic society won't be very happy with that

Its a nice old school tower, but I certainly wont miss it. It sits awkwardly in the center of a modernising skyline in one of the cities finest squares.

http://encyclopedia.quickseek.com/images/Birmingham_(UK)_skyline_-_Centenary_Square_700.jpg

The new design would have to step back from Colmore Row meeting the requirements of the extg one. It would have to be dynamic also, to sway me - still think an overhaul of what's there now would be great.

Wow a 100m office tower for Brum? sounds pretty good. If it does well maybe it will lead to an increased demand for office towers in the city.

^^Like at Snow Hill ;)

I think Snow Hill is the perfect location for 'Downtown Birmingham'.

The civic society won't be very happy with that

I think it depends. The figure I gave is a rough one (things must still be at an early stage) so I would take it as gospel.

If the new scheme respects the streetscape, and maybe incorporates stone (or reconstituted stone) at street level, then it could work.

A precedent has been set with Natwest Tower, and Alpha Tower at 100m has more of an impact on the Town Hall (which is Grade 1 listed) than this does on the Council House (Grade 2?).

It will all hinge on the final design. The Civic Society I am sure will accept that this will have a tower on it, given the price.

no no no bio, the civic society will not accept a tower, infact anytihg over the 6/7 storeys that curently exist and the civic society will not like. however, it is up to the developer (good old BL) to create a design soo good that the council will have no justified grounds to reject it!

Do we have any indication yet as to when a design for a building on this site may be made public, Woody?

I am afraid Woody that the Civic Society will HAVE to accept it because it would be a choice of leaving NWT to rot, or do something new. (I know you are with me on this one, but am just making a point).

A piece of prime real estate, bought for £25m, with a construction cost of £50m+ will need a tower to yield profit. 5/6 storeys will not do that.

Now the tower could be 50m, 75m or 100m, but I think they are sensible enough to see that the height should not be the issue (unless it is really tall and overbearing - and I think I would object to anything much above 100m), but it should be the form, the relationship to Colmore Row, and the materials.

So it is a simple choice - a decaying, patchy 60's (?) icon, or a new, more appropriate tower. If they oppose it outright, I think they will lose, but if they work with the developer, everyone might be happy :yes:

It was actually built in 1974, so it is barely 33 years old ... a mere 'baby' in architectural terms, but an ugly one nevertheless.

I can't see a tower of 100+ metres being built here, I think they will create an impressive first class building, but I imagine it to be more on the lines of 70 metres high.

I can't see your point about not wanting anything over 100m Bio? Surely it is the first 100m that will dominate the immediate surrounds... the second 100m (wishing a bit here) will dominate the skyline but make no extra impression from the immediate surrounds. The existing building is visible from Victoria Sq, Centenary Sq and Pigeon Park (the cathedral) Anything above 40-50m will impact of these views so once that is established what is wrong with it being 120, 140, 160m etc.

^^It is proportion rather than domination. In too many cities around the world you see beautiful historic buildings dwarfed by huge skyscrapers :(

BUT: thinking further, that is partly related to the footprint, as well as the height, materials etc. At least Natwest has a small footprint :yes:

It is a difficult site but a slender tower would look great giving a nice additon to the skyline, however it must not dominate the surrounding area, thats why the design has to be both asthetically pleasing and intelligently designed.

oh of course bio, i defo think we're singing from the same hyme sheet, i just think its a case of our views of the civic society that vary. i agree that they will shoot themselves in the foot opposing outright a tower on the site, but they have already stated thats their intentions and have fallen out with BCC because BCC wont rule out a tower!

just look at the decaying post and mail site, and the bomb plot of great charles street they have faught everything on.... i think some of the ppl running it really do have their priorities mixed up and really would prefer a decaying building!

I do agree with what you are saying about footprint Bio. I really think that the problem is that a tall building should never have been allowed on this site in the first place but that since that taboo has been broken and considering that we wont in all likely hood get a classically styled building i have no problem with a sensitively designed skyscraper (especially at ground level).

The reality is whatever is built will have to reach a certain height to be economically viable. All that given and what i said beforee about the first 50-80m being the issue i see no real height limitations on the site should be placed upon it.. whatever the developer feels is appropriate. It should be down to the quality of the application.

I could be convinced by your reasoned debate Engels :)

I look forward to seeing the designs. I will stake my place now and say that I think this will be Brum's best tower. Not the tallest, and not necessarily "iconic" (as in people might not necessarily say "Birmingham" when they see it) but I think it will just ooze quality :)

I tell you what Bio if it's a crap looking tower whatever height it is I'll object but in that case I don't think we will be the only ones shouting very loudly if it's not of the very best quality given the location.

^^ me too

I'd only be happy to accept a replacement if it's exceptional

Haven't seen this news till today, would be very impressive if true. I should think it will be very high quality considering hte location, price of land and the fact its British land, have you seen the towers they're building in london (the willis and leadenhall building) very classy! Hopefully we'll get some news sooner rather than later.

I bet you we'll see a separate planning application for demo to the construction one :yes:

Just a reminder of what was said:

British Land is expanding its provincial development portfolio with the addition of the former Nat West building in Colmore Row, Birmingham.

This prime city office site, located in the heart of Birmingham, was sold with vacant possession by Omega Land for £25 million.

British Land has appointed the architects Hamiltons to work with it to design a new high quality signature office building on what is widely believed to be the best office development site in central Birmingham.

Robert Samuel, Director of British Land Developments, said: “We have an established portfolio of development sites in the Midlands including Blythe Valley Business Park, Solihull and New Century Park, Coventry. We are pleased to have acquired this prime City centre site and are looking forward to working with Birmingham City Council and the local community to develop an iconic and attractive addition to Birmingham’s office skyline.”

Councillor Ken Hardeman, Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Birmingham City Council, said: "Whatever form it takes, I am sure that the scheme will be of the highest quality to reflect our aspirations for this prominent site in the heart of our civic and commercial area. I look forward to working with British Land to deliver a landmark scheme which will enhance Birmingham's reputation as a global city.

Interestingly, British Land own Rackhams :yes:

Interestingly, British Land own Rackhams :yes:
I bet you we'll see a separate planning application for demo to the construction one :yes:
Bio, you're latest comments could almost have come from Churchill.
:yes: Ohhh Yess

Is there anything we should be reading into these knowing nods?

I personally think that the replacement should effectvely mirror the previous building in profile - at least if it is going to be, say, 100m tall, then careful judicious planning can dictate that the new tower should have setbacks just like the old NatWest tower so that it doesn't become so overbearing on the immediate vicinity. I feel that a squat broad tower or block like Colmore Gate or the new Post and Mail would just be too overbearing - even at a modest height of 12-14 storeys.

The trick is to retain some semblance of harmony and sensitivity to this area by reducing the impact of the building at close quarters ... this can only be achieved by setting it back the higher it rises. Surely this is a perfectly workable blueprint with which to work? And we get to see an attractively tall but slender [tapering] tower in the city centre into the bargain that doesn't intrude too much on its surroundings. How about it?

I'd definitely agree Martin. The image of a prospective design that has been around for ages though sloping was still a crude block with no setback as in Natwest.
It certainly needs to maintain the height as its a very recognisable building be it from Hill Street coming up from the Queensway or near St Philips place.

What material do we think would be best. The initial image showed it all in glass but curvy and bulky. Im not sure myself but the area is very bricky and so anything too confrontation might not work.

Is there anything we should be reading into these knowing nods?

No :yes:



:rofl:

No - I don't know any particulars, but partially understand how things work :)

I personally think that the replacement should effectvely mirror the previous building in profile - at least if it is going to be, say, 100m tall, then careful judicious planning can dictate that the new tower should have setbacks just like the old NatWest tower so that it doesn't become so overbearing on the immediate vicinity. I feel that a squat broad tower or block like Colmore Gate or the new Post and Mail would just be too overbearing - even at a modest height of 12-14 storeys.

The trick is to retain some semblance of harmony and sensitivity to this area by reducing the impact of the building at close quarters ... this can only be achieved by setting it back the higher it rises. Surely this is a perfectly workable blueprint with which to work? And we get to see an attractively tall but slender [tapering] tower in the city centre into the bargain that doesn't intrude too much on its surroundings. How about it?

I think we will almost definitely see a set-back at 5th/6th floor level, and it would not surprise me if we have a mixture of glazing and reconstituted stone. It is feasible that a marble-clad could be used for the lower levels, and thinning out to glass for the upper floors.

Unless we get a fully glazed base and a pyramid rising, a la Shard.

^^ something like 30 Finsbury Square-ish would be nice http://www.ericparryarchitects.co.uk/pdf/fsq.pdf

...ah the conservation side of u shines through and through foxy hihi

^^ something like 30 Finsbury Square-ish would be nice http://www.ericparryarchitects.co.uk/pdf/fsq.pdf

Eew no :(

I quite like the building in isolation, but on Colmore Row, no.

I would like to see an interpretation of the ornate and classical lines of the rest of the road, that translates into a taller, graceful building.

In an ideal world I wouldn't see a tall building there, and it would be put elsewhere, but that ain't gonna happen.

...ah the conservation side of u shines through and through foxy hihi

ok, the present building stays :)

But first, I think it needs cleaning/recladding in the light brown colour so it'll match the other building.

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a366/robinsonworld/Birmingham/P1000359.jpg

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a366/robinsonworld/Birmingham/P1000360.jpg

This may be a strange thing to say if it matched more in colour it's dosn't stand out that much, well from the Council house side anyway!

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a366/robinsonworld/Birmingham/P1000360.jpg

althoguh the design and use of materials may be questinable, i think this tower is a perfect example of what a tower can add to a view in such an area. the tower is not so tall it is impossing, it is not built upto the facades of the original road layout, but it does draw the eye down the road. key to how line of sights and viewpoints should work imho

This building is one of those that looks good from a distance ..... up close it is not so good looking.

Bit more infor seeping out today!

* John Silver who led the Commerzbank HQ project in Frankfurt is leading this one.

* Architects are Hamiltons

* C.S have backed down aslong as the tower is set back from the regency buildings, which we had already discussed :)

* Even though initial designs angered the C.S with such a TALL tower rising in a conservation area they have subsequently back tracked aslong as its of high quality design.


and finally ...


* Its going to be considerably taller then it is now :banana:

Great news. Looking at the initial designs for the Commerzbank project, they were equally impressive as what was built.

Even though this is going to be a quality building and a lot taller, I can't help but feel quite sad that we're going to see this old bird going. She's graced our skyline for 30 years :cry:.

http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d101/Erebus555/DSC_0236.jpg
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d101/Erebus555/DSC_0135.jpg

anbody have any heights for the new tower or pictures of proposed designs?

nope and we're not likely to see anything either unless they are leaked... british land are the top dog when it come to regeneration... they aint gonna let anything slip before they allow it to slip if u see what i mean...

these are all possitive signs though!

I'm not quite sure why people are getting all sentimental about this building?

It is one of the ugliest buildings in Birmingham and a typical example of 70'a architechture. Looks like someone has built it with LEGO!

If we are getting something significantly taller than the current (100m?) then this will be really impressive in this area.

And sod the civic society - look at cities like New York where new imposing buildings compliment older ones?

I always think a classic example of this is when sitting in the James Brindley pub looking over Gas Street basin - you have the Tap and Spile pub and old building and then behind/above them some towering new structures - looks quality and shouts BIG CITY!!! :banana:

Agree utterly.

But not about the Natwest Tower, that's Good 70s!

I think it is quite unusual. It is pure Brutalism and whilst it is completely concrete and all dark and dull, it is a local landmark, something I'll miss. It shows the 1970s at it's best.

I'll be out in summer photographing every angle of this building for future generations :).

Agree utterly.

But not about the Natwest Tower, that's Good 70s!

Well that my point exactly thats the best of the 70's and its poo

dont say that, the civic society will fall on ya like a ton of bricks!

civic society = retired people with too much time on their hands.

When they were younger Brum was shit and now they want to stop this generation enjoying it.

Civic society dont have as much power as people seem to think. They just make sure people listen to them more then most and use issues like this as away to make themselves feel important. If regeneration is needed and its viable, c.s will have very little to stand on. Makes you happy we're Birmingham and not Liverpool!

well this is true... they have a very conservative counil anyway in terms of development and are a designeted UNESCO(???)

Yep, the World Heritage Site status meant that Brunswick Quay Tower got rejected. That's a shame considering how far away it actually was from it. :ohno:

nope and we're not likely to see anything either unless they are leaked... british land are the top dog when it come to regeneration... they aint gonna let anything slip before they allow it to slip if u see what i mean...

these are all possitive signs though!

There are some awesome British Land developments on Euston Road in London heading towards Gt Portland St tube.

Very sound :banana: :banana: :banana:

Yep, the World Heritage Site status meant that Brunswick Quay Tower got rejected. That's a shame considering how far away it actually was from it. :ohno:

You'd weep if you saw what they did to the Central Station tower. because it could be seen from the "historic" Ropewalks area...

But the thing is they seemed to want poor quailty mid rise buildings over good slightly higher ones. Silly people. Silly Council for caving in.

I do kinda like the Natwest Tower but the brickwork is of poor quality, and it has been vacant for ages - there is something wrong with it, whether it is wrong floorplates or low floor-floor level.

It is in completely the wrong place, but if it were, say, set back from Broad St or even on Bath Row, it would be worth trying to keep.

I HAVE heard, but unsubstantiated, that there is something wrong with the structure. I am not sure, but they said it was a steel frame and the fixings that hold the concrete panels on are corroding. Could just be speculation though.

I have also heard recently, with a little more credence, that the replacement will be "exceeding 100m". Could be marketing ploy though.

.....ok bio, start running now before all the questions start flooding in lol!

:runaway:

lol, this will be an interesting one to watch on an honest note... everyone keep their ears to the ground and watch this space!

Its going to be a rather thin but soaring tower baring in mind the snippets we've been given so far. I just pray its got a spire like Heron in LDN.

I don't like Heron... It doesn't scream "Wow!" at me.

I didnt say tower, I said spire ;)

I still hope its a bit unqiue however or maybe even a smaller LBT.

I don't like Heron... It doesn't scream "Wow!" at me.

Heron's kinda squawk, not scream.

Love the avatar erebus :)

Heron's kinda squawk, not scream.

*groan*

Love the avatar erebus :)

Thanks :okay:

y dnt they make a taller building is stead of a small one?

^^Um, they are going to. :happy:

;)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/woodhousen/cpp.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/woodhousen/cpside.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/woodhousen/cp1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/woodhousen/cp2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v441/woodhousen/cp3.jpg

About 34 stories then!

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

tht is 162m

God thats good :banana:

No fucking way!

No fucking way!

And this isn't even a resi tower either!

C'mon Woody, this ain't mind games is it?

:lol: :lol: :lol: MArtin your a classic.

god, u gotta love google sketchup

Don't take this the wrong but I don't like that. The tower is a bit boring for my liking - but I'm loving the atrium area!

By the way, where are you getting these maps from?